GRGR (2) "great bright hand"

[Terrance F. Flaherty]

Paul Mackin wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Terrance F. Flaherty wrote:
>
> >
> > Doug Millison wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know. TRP brings in all sorts of arcana -- we've already
> > > encountered the allusion to the I Ching ("Youthful Folly" wasn't it), but
> > > it doesn't seem as fundamental, to me at least, as the Puritan theology. Do
> > > you see a significant Daoist element in GR?
> > >
> >
> > How can one argue that Puritan theology is more fundamental? Because it's alluded
> > to more often?
>
> Also it's easier to follow, isn't it?

Not for me. The context fits in a sense. We are in Europe in a sense. But, context and
ideas conflate as in Melville, who uses ideas as context and environment for the
development of action in his novels.

> Nothing terribly esoteric or
> i-ching-istic about this extreme Calvinistic or Puritan version of
> Christian theology, which isn't taken straight of course but rather turned

> on its head--so that the usual arrangement of Us being Saved and Them
> being Condemned is reversed (more or less).

More or less, ah there's the rub a dub a dub three god's in a tub and we all go to
heaven in a big blue boat, a god, a god man and a god spirit with protean
characteristics. Pretty esoteric stuff.

> Very elegant to my
> sensibilities and so very  suggestive of man's natural condition on earth.
> (the other side of the coin of course is that eastern philosophies tend to
> be quite open ended and more in keeping with what Pynchon's sposed to be
> about)

I don't think it's fair to characterize the eastern philosophies or religions  as "open
ended." There are, for example, Taoists that might not fit what you have in mind. There
are also Christian theologians (we never really discussed Pynchon's reference to
Teilhard De Chardin, but i think he's important--Max?) that are more in keeping with
Pynchon than say, Confucius on some elementals and principles.

Terrance-- like a carvell cone on subway platform in august in NYC.

>
>
>